Fr. Rama P. Coomraswamy, M.D. (born 1929 – died
2006), was a self-professed Roman Catholic priest who converted to
“Catholicism” at age 22. He was ordained to the priesthood by Bishop Jose
Gaston Ramon Lopez (a sedevacantist
bishop) at the presence of Fr. Malachi Martin, a Vatican professor and a close
friend of John XXIII and Paul VI.

Fr. Rama Coomaraswamy was born as the third child to the
famous art philosopher and pagan father, Dr. Ananda Coomaraswamy, who
specialized in the scholarly studies of Indian culture and Hinduism. Some of
Fr. Rama Coomraswamy's most notorious activities
include being Mother Theresa's personal physician, brain surgeon,
psychologist, psychiatrist, seminary professor, university professor, and a priest.

In his theological works Rama P. Coomaraswamy buries the
idea that the Vatican II sect is the Catholic Church that Christ founded.
Coomaraswamy discusses in detail what 'tradition' (the teachings and practices
which comprise the Magisterium) mean to a Catholic. Using as evidence Christ's
own words, the Epistles, Church Councils, papal pronouncements, and history he
demonstrates that, for a Catholic, the Magisterium cannot change. However, the
Vatican II sect argues that the Magisterium can change. Thus the Vatican II
sect is not Catholic.

The Destruction of the Christian Tradition

Fr. Rama P. Coomraswamy's book, The Destruction of the
Christian Tradition (first published January 1, 1981) explains the
aggiornamento of the Conciliar Church and how it "changed" the
Catholic Church with a new ecclesiology, i.e., the nature of the Church being
"updated" with times. (In reality, however, the Vatican II Church is not
the Catholic Church but the end times Counter Church. See Is the Vatican II
sect the Whore of Babylon Prophesied in the Apocalypse?)

Fr. Coomaraswamy explains that most of the 7 sacraments have
gone invalid. His position was that the New Rite of
Episcopal Consecration for Bishops and Ordinations for Priests are doubtfully
valid due to defect of form and intention. (It must be pointed out however that
the New Rite of consecrating Bishops and the New Rite of ordaining Priests must
be not only be considered doubtful, but also invalid. See Why
the New Rite of Ordination & New
Rite of Consecration of Bishops are Invalid). The New Rite of Holy
Orders as stated by Fr. Coomaraswamy were changed by “Archbishop” Annibale
Bugnini—who was the primary architect of the New Mass and a Freemason—and the 6
Protestant ministers who composed the Novus
Ordo Missae (the New Mass) for Paul VI. It is thus true to say that
Vatican II made their "Mass" more Protestant, and specifically
Anglican. This is not even debatable: this is supported by the Vatican II
instigators own words and deeds.

The six Protestant Ministers who helped design the New Mass
were: Drs. George, Jasper, Shepherd, Kunneth, Smith and Thurian.

Paul VI even admitted to his good
friend Jean Guitton that his intention in changing the Mass was to make it
Protestant.

Jean Guitton (an intimate friend of Paul VI) wrote: “The intention
of Pope Paul VI with regard to what is commonly called the [New] Mass, was to
reform the Catholic liturgy in such a way that it should almost coincide with
the Protestant liturgy. There was with Pope Paul VI an ecumenical intention to
remove, or, at least to correct, or, at least to relax, what was too Catholic
in the traditional sense in the Mass and, I repeat, to get the Catholic Mass
closer to the Calvinist Mass.” (Rama Coomeraswamy, The Problems with the New
Mass, Tan Books, p. 34.)

In the chapter called 'Communist infiltration of the
Church', did you know that the Vatican II sect was honoring the Soviet
state-implanted "hierarchy" while deliberately abandoning the priests
who were standing up to Communist oppression? Or that then-"Cardinal"
Montini's private secretary was discovered to be a Communist agent whose
activities led to the deaths of priests in the Russian bloc? Or that while the
real Church always condemned Communism, the antipopes went out of their way to
praise it? Or that then-bishop Wojtyla was the only bishop allowed free travel
in Soviet Poland?

Rama Coomaraswamy further demonstrates how the post
conciliar church is actually the continuation of the modernistic views
propagated by Antipope John the 23rd, reaching fruition in Vatican
2, effectively muting the voice of tradition while propagating the errors of
modernism.

He wrote in the first chapter of this book, "No one
disputes the fact that after Vatican II, the Catholic Church was different. The
fundamental question is whether the changes... involved fundamental points of
doctrine and practice. If the latter is the case, one would be forced to
conclude that the post-Conciliar Church is no longer the same as its
pre-Vatican II counterpart... The answer to the query posed at the start of
this chapter—'Is it the same Church?'—will by and large depend upon the answers
given to these questions... This book will attempt to answer these
questions." (Pg. 2)

"There can be no doubt that the post-Conciliar 'Popes'
have rejected the authority of the Magisterium and would lead us to do the
same. They have thus lost their authority because it cannot be said of them
that he who hears them is hearing Christ." (p. 43)

"Men have rebelled against that Christianity which is
true and faithful to Christ and His doctrines. In its place they have fashioned
Christianity to their own liking, a new idol which does not save, which is not
opposed to the passions of carnal desires nor to the greed of gold and silver
which fascinates, nor to the pride of Life; a new religion without a soul,
without religion, a mask of dead Christianity without the spirit of
Christ." (Pope Pius XII, quoted on p. 384)

He states that post-Conciliar Catholics "cannot 'pick
and choose' just what he will accept in the New Church without declaring that
it is in fact his own 'private opinion' that is the basic authority for his
decision. The 'post-Conciliar Catholic,' no matter how 'sincere,' is plainly
and simply, no longer a Roman Catholic." (Pg. 104) He adds,
"Present-day Catholics are faced with a terrible dilemma. If they obey the
post-Conciliar 'Popes,' they must apostatize from the Catholic Faith as it has
existed since the time of Christ and the Apostles." (Pg. 129)

He explains, "A traditional Catholic is one who adheres
to the teachings of the Church as they have always been. He insists upon the
traditional sacraments administered by validly ordained priests, as he rejects
the teachings of Vatican II, the Novus Ordo Missae, and all the other
post-Conciliar sacraments." (Pg. 429) He adds, "The fact remains that
the true Church has become an underground Church, much as happened during the
time of the Reformation in England, or again in France where Catholics refused
to accept the 'constitutional' priests." (Pg. 432)

Father Coomaraswamy argues convincingly that if you accept
the Council of Trent and Vatican I you cannot accept Vatican II and the
"New Church". Like Father James Wathen in his tour de force The Great
Sacrilege, Father Coomaraswamy presents an overly convincing case that the
Roman Catholic Church (except for a marginalized faithful remnant) no longer
exists as a social institution. It has been destroyed from within and reduced
to a remnant. The Catholic Church now can only be found among those scattered
faithful to the pre-Vatican II teachings.

Prophecy
of St. Nicholas of Fluh (1417-1487): “The Church will be punished because the
majority of her members, high and low, will become so perverted. The Church
will sink deeper and deeper until she will at last seem to be extinguished, and
the succession of Peter and the other Apostles to have expired. But, after
this, she will be victoriously exalted in the sight of all doubters.”

On Sept. 19, 1846, the Church approved apparition Our Lady
of La Salette prophesied that Rome would lose the Faith and become the Seat of
the Antichrist in a final days apostasy from the one true Catholic Faith.

Our
Lady of La Salette, Sept. 19, 1846: “Rome will lose the Faith and become the
seat of the Anti-Christ… the Church will be in eclipse.”

While the author has many great insights, sometimes his
theology lacks clarity and decision.

For example, after the author proves that the antipopes are
not Catholic, and that the sedevacantist position (that there is no currently
reigning pope) is the correct one to hold, he seems to concede that it is OK
for a Catholic to believe the nonsense that John Paul II, et alius, are popes
"materially" but not "formally" (a modernist innovation
that the Church never held).

As another example, after irrefutably showing that the new
Mass and new Rite of Ordination respectively lack the sacrifice, tradition and
apostolic succession, he then claims that the new Mass and Ordination of
priests are only "doubtful" - not unquestionably invalid.

The greatest flaws, however, in the book, are its promotion
of heresies. After quoting John 3:5 ("unless a man be born again of water
and the Holy Spirit, he shall not enter the kingdom of heaven"),
Coomaraswamy then in effect calls Christ a liar and claims that one does not
need water baptism in order to enter heaven. (This is the heresy of baptism
of desire, and it is thoroughly refuted by the online video
"Baptism of Desire Buried".) He also promotes the idea that someone
who is "invincibly ignorant" of the Gospel can be saved. Not only
does this (again) deny the necessity of water baptism, but it was never held by
any Doctor or saint of the Church. (These issues are thoroughly covered in the
book *Outside the Catholic
Church There is Absolutely No Salvation*, available from Most Holy
Family Monastery (also see Most
Holy Family Monastery Beliefs, Heresies and Practises Exposed in order
to be aware of their soul slaying heresies).

THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM IS NECESSARY FOR
SALVATION

To further show that the
Sacrament of Baptism is necessary for salvation, I will quote numerous
infallible statements from the Chair of St. Peter.

Pope
Paul III, The Council of Trent, Sess. 7, Can. 5 on the Sacrament
of Baptism, ex cathedra: “If anyone says that baptism [the
Sacrament] is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation (cf. Jn. 3:5): let
him be anathema.”

This infallible dogmatic
definition from the Chair of St. Peter condemns anyone who says that the
Sacrament of Baptism is not necessary for salvation. The Sacrament of Baptism
is necessary for all for salvation, first of all, because, as the Council of
Trent defines, all men (except the Blessed Virgin Mary) were conceived in a
state of original sin as a result of the sin of Adam, the first man. The
Sacrament of Baptism is also necessary for all for salvation because it is the
means by which one is marked as a member of Jesus Christ and incorporated into
His Mystical Body. And in defining the truth that all men were conceived in the
state of Original Sin, the Council of Trent specifically declared that the
Blessed Virgin Mary was an exception to its decree on Original Sin. But in
defining the truth that the Sacrament of Baptism is necessary for salvation,
the Council of Trent made no exceptions at all.

Pope
Eugene IV, The Council of Florence, “Exultate Deo,” Nov. 22, 1439: “Holy
baptism, which is the gateway to the spiritual life, holds the first place
among all the sacraments; through it we are made members of Christ and of the
body of the Church. And since death entered the universe through the first
man, ‘unless we are born again of water and the Spirit, we cannot,’ as the
Truth says, ‘enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5]. The matter
of this sacrament is real and natural water.”

Pope
Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, Constitution 1, 1215, ex
cathedra: “But the sacrament of baptism is consecrated in water at the
invocation of the undivided Trinity – namely, Father, Son and Holy Ghost – and
brings salvation to both children and adults when it is correctly carried
out by anyone in the form laid down by the Church.”

Pope
Pius XI, Quas Primas (# 15), Dec. 11, 1925 : “Indeed this kingdom is
presented in the Gospels as such, into which men prepare to enter by doing
penance; moreover, they cannot enter it except throughfaith
and baptism, which, although an external rite, yet signifies
and effects an interior regeneration.”

We see here that one cannot
enter the kingdom of Heaven without faith and the external rite of baptism
(i.e., the Sacrament of Baptism). Ignorant people nowadays contradict this fact
and claim that people can reach heaven without a real and actual water baptism.
One could easily understand if a person were ignorant of these facts and
believed that a person or infant could be Saved without the sacrament of
baptism since many have been wrong on this issue, even Saints. But when one has
seen these infallible dogmatic declarations from the Popes, and still
obstinately hold to the position that people or infants can be saved without
real and actual water baptism, he is a heretic. A heretic is a person who
obstinately, willfully and knowingly hold an opinion which he knows to be in
opposition with what the Church teach.

Pope
Paul III, The Council of Trent, Can. 2 on the Sacrament of Baptism,
Sess. 7, 1547, ex cathedra: “If anyone shall say that real and
natural water is not necessary for baptism, and on that account those words
of Our Lord Jesus Christ: ‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy
Spirit’ [John 3:5], are distorted into some sort of metaphor: let him
be anathema.”

Pope
Benedict XIV, Nuper ad nos, March 16, 1743, Profession of Faith: “Likewise
(I profess) that baptism is necessary for salvation, and hence, if there is
imminent danger of death, it should be conferred at once and without delay, and
that it is valid if conferred with the right matter and form and intention by
anyone, and at any time.”

Catechism
of the Council of Trent, Baptism made obligatory after Christ’s Resurrection,
p. 171: “Holy writers are unanimous in saying that after the Resurrection of
our Lord, when He gave His Apostles the command to go and teach all
nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of
the Holy Ghost, the law of Baptism became obligatory on all who were to
be saved.”

For a person to assert that
salvation can be attained invincibly or ignorantly by Jews, pagans, heretics or
schismatics without baptism or the Catholic Faith, is truly the most evil of
doctrine since it renders Faith in Jesus Christ and the true Catholic Faith
meaningless. According to this erroneous world view, anyone who is “good” can
attain eternal life.

PROOF FOR THE SEDEVACANTIST POSITION

In order to
prove that one cannot obstinately regard Antipope Francis as a Pope without
becoming a heretic, here are some of his worst heresies which proves that he is
a complete heretic.

In On Heaven and Earth, pp. 12-13 Francis says he respects
atheists and doesn’t try to convert them. He also says that their “life is not
condemned”:

“I do not approach the relationship in order to proselytize, or
convert the atheist; I respect him… nor would I say that his life is condemned, because I am
convinced that I do not have the right to make a judgment about the honesty of
that person… every man is the image of God, whether he is a believer or not.
For that reason alone everyone has a series of virtues, qualities, and a
greatness of his own.” (Francis, On Heaven and Earth, pp. 12-13)

In contrast to Francis, the Council of Florence dogmatically
defined that any individual who has a view contrary to the Catholic Church’s
teaching on Our Lord Jesus Christ or the Trinity, or any one of the truths
about Our Lord or the Trinity, is rejected, condemned
and anathematized by God.

Pope Eugene IV, Council of
Florence, Bull Cantate Domino, 1442, ex cathedra: “… the holy Roman Church,
founded on the words of our Lord and Savior, firmly believes, professes and
preaches one true God, almighty, immutable and eternal, Father, Son and Holy
Spirit… Therefore it [the Church] condemns, rejects,
anathematizesand declares to be outside the Body of
Christ [and of God], which is the Church, whoever holds opposing or
contrary views.”

An atheists interviewed Francis for the Italian newspaper The
Republic. The interview was published on October 1, 2013. Francis directly
told the atheist that he has no intention of trying to convert him. Francis
rejects proselytism four different times in this interview. Francis declared: “Proselytism
is solemn nonsense, it makes no sense.”

Now, our Lord commanded the apostle to go and proselytize, to go
and teach. He said: “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them
in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them
to observe all things whatsoever I have commended you.” (Matthew 28:19)

How clear is that? And what’s really outrageous about this
statement is that he’s essentially spitting on and mocking the martyrs, who
suffered, died, were tortured, for teaching, preaching and spreading the true
faith; and this apostate has the nerve to call it a solemn nonsense. That
anyone claiming to be the Pope says such an evil statement, is incredible.

Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum
(# 13), June 29, 1896: “Therefore if a man does not want to be, or to be
called, a heretic, let him not strive to please this or that man… but
let him hasten before all things to be in communion with the Roman See.”

Pope Pius IV, profession of
faith, Council of Trent, ex cathedra: “This true Catholic faith, outside
of which no one can be saved… I now profess and truly hold…”

The Catholic Church infallibly teaches that atheists are
condemned and that they must be converted to the Catholic faith for salvation.
Yet, Antipope Francis is dominating the headlines around the world with his
assertion that people don’t need to believe in God to get to heaven.

Antipope Francis, Evangelii
Gaudium (# 254), Nov. 24, 2013: “Non-Christians[such as
atheists], by God’s gracious initiative, when they are faithful to their own
consciences, can live “justified by the grace of God”, and
thus be “associated to the paschal mystery of Jesus Christ”… to the sacramental
dimension of sanctifying grace... to live our own beliefs.”

Some may argue that when Francis continued in his Evangelii
Gaudium, saying: “they [false religions, practices and beliefs] can be
channels which the Holy Spirit raises up in order to liberate non-Christians
from atheistic immanentism or from purely individual religious experiences” --
that this means they will be converted. But we already know he doesn’t believe
the Catholic Faith is necessary for salvation, and that he rejects
proselytizing atheists; so that is not what he means. He is just saying it
could happen - “they can” - not that it will, which is why he said: they
can be justified if they follow their conscience. And then he ended saying:
“which can help us better to live our own beliefs.” (Evangelii
Gaudium, # 254)

His position is of course, heresy and apostasy. He made a similar
statement in an open letter to the founder of the newspaper La Repubblica.

Statements like this only confirm what we’ve documented about the
Vatican II antipopes, and what was proven in the video “What Francis Really Believes.” I’ve read Francis’ entire
letter. The headlines accurately reflect what Antipope Francis wrote in his Evangelii
Gaudium.

Concerning atheists, Francis wrote:

“First of all, you ask if the God of Christians forgives
those who do not believe and do not seek faith. Given that - and this is
fundamental - God’s mercy has no limits if he who asks for mercy does so in
contrition and with a sincere heart, the issue for those who do not believe
in God is in obeying their own conscience. In fact, listening and
obeying it, means deciding about what is perceived to be good or to be evil.
The goodness or the wickedness of our behavior depends on this decision.”
(“Pope” Francisco writes to La Repubblica: “An open dialogue with
non-believers”, 2013/09/11/)

Here Francis clearly indicates that people who don’t believe in
God can be forgiven and saved if they obey their own conscience and follow what
they perceive to be good; and later in his “Evangelii Gaudium” (254) he
confirmed that this indeed was what he meant. So don’t allow any liar
to claim that Francis’ statement has been misrepresented. It has not been
misrepresented as Francis himself confirmed.

That’s an astounding heresy because it’s a basic dogma of
Catholicism that faith is necessary for salvation. This is a fundamental issue.
As Hebrews 11:6 says, “…without faith it is impossible to please God.”

Copyright: All videos and articles on our site are free to copy and share for free. Please remember to also include live links to the source of the info.
We are looking for translators who have the skill to make a good translation of important articles for the salvation of souls. We are also in need of translators who can translate Saint Bridget's Revelations into different languages. If you can help us on this important work, please contact us here.
We need your help! We are spending all the time our expenses among things like websites, webhotels, and giving away free material, dvds and books in order to warn people and tell them the truth. So if you like the material and want to help us—and be yourself a sharer—in saving souls, then please make a donation, pray for us and help us spread it in order to help our beloved brothers and sisters who have not found this information yet. If you have been graced by God with the means to do so, please support our work. Any donation that you can give is highly appreciated and much needed! Help us help our beloved brothers' and sisters' souls. Your Support Counts! All for the Glory of God and the salvation of souls! Please click here!
"And whosoever shall give to drink to one of these little ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple, amen I say to you, he shall not lose his reward." Matthew 10:42